I Asked HBR Readers How They Negotiate — Here’s What I Found

What’s your go-to negotiation style, and what are the consequences of your tactical choices? That’s what more than 14,000 HBR readers from around the world, at various stages in their careers, set out to learn about themselves when they completed this self-assessment, which I created based on extensive research. Having reviewed their responses, I’m struck by two findings — one expected, one not. Both point to useful insights for negotiators.

As I anticipated, people often reported preferences and tendencies that contradicted their professed general approach. Consider, for instance, what respondents said about how they tend to begin negotiations: Almost seven out of ten answered, “I like to show at the outset that I’m open-minded and flexible” or, in the same spirit, “I try not to seem too tough, because it might make the other side hostile.” (The other two options involved starting out more assertively.) Yet fewer than three in ten said that they preferred to make the first serious offer. Twice as many said they’d rather have the other party go first.

Though it’s tempting to regard this reticence as a social courtesy — like opening the door for someone else — it’s more likely a defensive stance, stemming from a fear of underbidding. People often hope that by waiting, they can get their counterpart to offer more than they’ve dared to ask for. So, when it comes to putting a number on the table, they’re withholding, rather than being “open-minded” and “not too tough.”

The lesson here? Strategy should drive our tactics, not vice-versa. Our counterparts see only our actions, not our intentions. If we want others to view us as flexible and easygoing, then we have to walk that talk, in this instance by being more forthcoming.

That’s easier said than done. We’re all complicated — each one of us. Social interactions, including negotiation, can spark conflicting impulses. Even so, we should step back to ensure that our moment-to-moment actions are essentially consistent with our larger agendas.

Now, here’s the surprising finding: Men’s and women’s tactical choices were virtually identical. (The respondents were 62% male and 38% female.) This was true not only for preferred initial style but also for showing or hiding their cards and for starting high or low when making an offer.

For example:

When Negotiating, Men and Women Use Similar Tactics for the Opening Offer

The breakdown for more than 14,000 HBR readers who were asked whether they start high or low.

NEGOTIATING TACTIC

Men

Women

I ask for much more than I expect the other side to give, in order to leave room for concessions later on.

30%

33%

I estimate what the other side can give and ask for a little less than that, so that they are satisfied.

10%

8%

I try to propose a deal that would be fair to both of us.

51%

50%

I consider where I would be without a deal and then ask for something better than that.

9%

9%

Source “Assessment: What Kind of Negotiator Are You?” by Michael Wheeler

Among the men, 30% said that they tend to start with a bold ask. For women the number was just marginally higher, at 33%. The male/female percentages were close or equal for the other three options, as well.

These results appear to run counter to a lot of research about gender and negotiation, notably Linda Babcock and Sara Laschever’s ground-breaking book Women Don’t Ask and the subsequent work it inspired. Studies indicate that women tend not to be as bold (or perhaps as audacious) as men when advocating for themselves.

But three caveats are important. First, HBR readers may not be representative of the broader population. (For that matter, people who choose to take the assessment may not be representative of HBR readers.) Second, self-reported preferences and tactics may not match what people would do in a lab experiment — and surveys and lab studies may not square with real-world behavior. Third, and perhaps most important, women who responded to this study may well have been thinking about professional rather than personal negotiations, such as buying a home or car for themselves. If so, these results fit with existing research, which suggests that women are as assertive as men when it comes to representing their colleagues, organizations, and family members.

Still, the similarity in male and female responses should raise a yellow caution flag for all negotiators: Don’t fall into the gender-stereotype trap. Knowing the gender of the person you’re dealing with tells you little, if anything, about how he or she approaches negotiation or the tactics he or she is likely to employ. Whatever gender tendencies may exist (if any) are minor compared with the much greater variation there is within each group. There are competitive, assertive women, just as there are collaborative, empathetic men. And wherever your counterparts are on those dimensions, your task is to get them to think and behave in ways that serve your interests.

That last point brings us back to tactics. My colleague Deepak Malhotra puts it well in his new book, Negotiating the Impossible. “Not only is it difficult to generalize about the wisdom of a particular tactic,” he says, “there are also too many tactics to keep track of.” He advises working from broader strategic principles instead. His core list includes negotiating the process before getting to substance, framing problems creatively, and recognizing the need for parties to save face.

I couldn’t agree more. Any negotiation tactics you use should advance such ends, not subvert them.

Michael Wheeler has taught negotiation in Harvard Business School’s MBA and executive education programs since 1993. His iOS Negotiation 360 app profiles users’ interpersonal and problem-solving skills so people can learn the right lessons from their negotiation experience.